"Men and women are just different and have different skills and talents"

'It is because we believe in your humanity, against all the evidence'

That's really lovely - I find it very moving actually

Having nimble fingers was seen as a female skill for years and is partly based in biology because girls tend to develop fine motor skills earlier than boys (again bell curve etc).

Funny then, that it didn't lead to all surgeons or mechanics being female - oh no, that kind of technical skill is MANLY and besides you don't want to get blood/oil on you - go use your nimble fingers for cross stitch or darning instead.

I think a quote from Dworkin is appropriate in response to that Yops

I don’t believe rape is inevitable or natural. If I did, I would have no reason to be here. If I did, my political practice would be different than it is. Have you ever wondered why we [women] are not just in armed combat against you? It’s not because there’s a shortage of kitchen knives in this country. It is because we believe in your humanity, against all the evidence.

Even if violence is down to "biological differences" in men socialisation can overcome it. I get desperately sad on threads where people come on and seem to think violence is inevitable.

This "biological difference" always is used to say that women are shit or to justify shitty treatment of women.

Is that the nub of the problem, then? What if it were used instead to say 'this is (partly) why men are violent/antisocial/twatty - what do we do about it?' Does that move the discussion on to somewhere more useful?

I went on Fire Safety training today (work for NHS) and the trainer, who wa a man, told us that when there's a fire, women tend to pick up their handbags and coats and run for it, whereas men just can't wait to grab the nearest fire extinguisher and get stuck in. He put this down to men being stupid and women being more intelligent. Chortle chortle. How very hilarous

I realised I could either sigh deeply and let it wash over me, or go into a full on screaming melt down right then and there. Today, I chose the former. It was a challenge though

'I wish it would just fucking stop'

This. Very much this. It makes me so tired

I'm seriously bored of this neurotrash business. This "biological difference" always is used to say that women are shit or to justify shitty treatment of women. I wish it would just fucking stop.

Sometimes I can't even bear to say this much.

(Compare and contrast my "discourse" to Buffy's. )

The only context I have heard where males are referred to as 'hormonal' is as moody, stroppy or horny teenagers.

I think there are reasons why feminists might be less interested in hormonal gender differences. One being that it might be seen as letting men off the hook for violent or anti-social behaviour. That is if there are any significant differences. As I said before, I don't know.

From the OP - I keep reading conflicting scientific reports on the differences between men and women's brain and what, if anything, that actually means about different skills/intelligence etc.

What are the difference levels in the hormones between men and women, if they were shown on a Bell curve? Are there massive overlaps with little difference, or vice versa? I don't know, but somebody here probably will. Does the level of oestrogen and testosterone vary hugely across the population by gender? And do any other hormones vary significantly?

I wonder if it's that curve again. For the vast majority of people, being socialised is enough I think.

Then there's the people at the edges who would either always be non-violent, or always be violent, and the men tend towards the violent edge, and the women tend towards the non-violent edge. I think that testosterone, chromosomal defects, and certain character traits being brought up in a society that doesn't condemn violence harshly enough might explain them.

So for most people who just want a nice, quiet, normal life, they pootle through doing roughly what society expects of them, and as feminists, we want those expectations to be a bit better for women.

Delusions of Gender is £1 on Kindle at the minute. I've added it to my basket!

Thanks for the nod on that, just bought it too.

I don't think it's a case of innately having different skills but I am not persuaded that the fact women generally do not resort to violence or generally drink and drive or drive at speed is just down to "the society tells girls to be good" argument. I think society tells all of us to be good.

Women seem better to understand the consequences of negative behaviour - why is that?

As for wife-work - the remedy is in women's own hands. If you don't want to be the person responsible for remembering birthdays etc, then don't do it. I haven't in 25 plus years sent a card to any of my husband's family. Don't do it and then complain about it.

We us 'us'. Society. You and me and everyone else on this discussion, and outside of it. Everyone.

I wasn't saying good or bad. I thought we were exploring the phenomenon, and possible reasons for it's existence.

Well here's a nice encapsulated thing to retort with another time somebody says something.

"Yes! Isn't it funny how people are so much better at things they've had lots of practice at."

who is "we" yops, and does that make it all OK?

We like our society ordered though, don't we? If we can fit people into little boxes, assign them roles, keep them occupied, isn't it supposed to make the whole thing tick over better, make us easier to govern, and easier to provide for? Plus it allows us to make judgments quicker - isn't that what stereotypes are for?

What pisses me off the most is the whole women are better at multi-tasking/noticing new haircuts/remembering birthdays thing

It sounds like you might want to add the book "Wifework" to your library waiting list, then.

YYY Chunky.

sure, on a population there are differences - but even if they are innate, it doesn't help on an individual level.

If you plot a chart showing the skill level at (for example) putting up shelves for a population, it will likely follow the standard bell shape. If you split that up into men and women, then they'll each follow that standard bell, but perhaps with the men having their peak at a higher skill level. The vast, vast majority of all people will fall in the overlapping area though.

so given a person's skill level at putting up shelves, outside of the major outliers, you just can't tell whether someone is a man or a woman because we're all in the big lump in the middle together.

Pretty much every skill or talent I've ever seen follows that pattern when you look at data (in fact, almost everything does) - so the idea of there being masculine or feminine only skills is clearly ridiculous.